MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064231809 · doi:10.1108/17439131111122120

Market regimes, sectorial investments, and time‐varying risk premiums

2011· article· en· W2064231809 on OpenAlexaff
Peixin Liu, Kuan Xu, Yonggan Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Managerial Finance · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolatility (finance)EconomicsMarkov chainEconometricsMacroRisk premiumFinancial economicsMarket riskMonetary economicsStatisticsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to extend the Fama and French (FF) three‐factor model in studying time‐varying risk premiums of Sector Select Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) under a Markov regime‐switching framework. Design/methodology/approach First, the original FF model is augmented to include three additional macro factors – market volatility, yield spread, and credit spread. Then, the FF model is extended to a model with a Markov regime switching mechanism for bull, bear, and transition market regimes. Findings It is found that all market regimes are persistent, with the bull market regime being the most persistent, and the bear market regime being the least persistent. Both the risk premiums of the Sector Select ETFs and their sensitivities to the risk factors are highly regime dependent. Research limitations/implications The regime‐switching model has a superior performance in capturing the risk sensitivities of the Sector Select ETFs, that would otherwise be missed by both the FF and the augmented FF models. Originality/value This is the first research on Sector Select ETFs with Markov regime switching.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Managerial FinanceSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207